SUCCESSFUL PRESENTATION SKILLS BY ANDREW BRADBURY PDF
C R E A T I N G S U C C E S S. Successful. Presentation. Skills. Andrew Bradbury . Third edition. London and Philadelphia. C R E A T I N G S U C C E S S. Successful Presentation Skills book. Read 3 reviews from the world's largest community for readers. A good presentation involves effective communication. “Successful Presentation Skills” Andrew Bradbury, 3rd Edition, , Kogan Page, London. Article in Request Full-text Paper PDF. Citations.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Arabic|
|Genre:||Children & Youth|
|ePub File Size:||17.78 MB|
|PDF File Size:||12.20 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Regsitration Required]|
“Successful Presentation Skills” Andrew Bradbury, 3rd Edition, , Kogan Page, London. Leanne Boyd. Full Text: PDF. DOI: ppti.info The PDF file you selected should load here if your Web browser has a PDF reader plug-in installed (for example, a recent version of Adobe Acrobat Reader). Buy Successful Presentation Skills (3rd edition) 3 by Andrew Bradbury (ISBN: ) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free.
Juhnke, Kenneth M. Coll, Michael F.
Academic oral presentation skills dr mohammed ghazy m
Sunich, and Ronda R. The Family Journal, Oct ; vol. For more material of a similar nature, a list of serious NLP-related research papers collected by Dr.
Paul Tosey of the University of Surrey can be found here: , and a list of relevant education-related articles are included at the end of FAQ An even more basic error is the subject of the next claim: 'Neither is any of this material taught on psychology courses at pre-degree and degree level. NLP gets plenty of attention at the University of Surrey, for example, and at least two people at that institution have taken investigations of NLP as their Ph.
Both candidates came up with results which supported the validity of the techniques being investigated.
In Australia there is a post-graduate course in NLP run jointly by the NLP training company, Inspiritive, and the University of Sydney, and those two organizations are also working together on 'scientific' studies of various NLP-related techniques and concepts. Dr Heap's article also, somewhat ingenuously, I think, asks, 'Why this almost total neglect of a body of knowledge that, if it has any authenticity, should occupy a pivotal role in the study of human psychology?
I assume that when you play athletics or make love, you have a lot more kinesthetic sensitivity.
When you are reading or watching a movie, you have a lot of visual consciousness. You can shift from one to another.
Shop by category
Italics as in the original text. And time itself can be an important factor in determining the difference between two contexts even when they might otherwise appear to be more or less the same. Yet Dr Heap, despite having done "some basic training" and having "read some of the main texts at that time" which included Frogs into Princes - first sentence of IV3, page 6 - says nothing about the experimenters' failure to notice that they were totally ignoring, or simply weren't aware of, the claims that Bandler and Grinder had made on this subject.
Indeed, did Dr Heap himself notice the blatant contradiction? This really goes to the heart of the question of whether people like Dr Heap, Professor Levelt of the Max Plank Institute in Nijmegen, Holland and others of similar standing, are really qualified to make objective judgements about NLP.
I do not for one moment question the fact that these two men are genuine experts in their own fields of study - hypnosis and psychotherapy for Dr Heap, and psycholinguistics for Prof. But how does that qualify them as experts on NLP?
In two words, 'It doesn't'. In fact both men have proved themselves notably short on expertise when it comes to NLP, possibly because a it is outside of their specialist areas of knowledge, and b it seems that neither of them did what was required to bring themselves up to speed on the subject. Despite its substantial inaccuracies, Dr Heap's review has nevertheless been quoted innumerable times as though its content was reliable, for example by hypnotherapist Dr.
Dylan Morgan, writing for the Journal of the National Council for Psychotherapy and Hypnotherapy Register, Spring issue of still accessible on his web site , and by Dr. Robert Carroll, who uncritically cited Morgan's commentary on Dr Heap's allegedly authoritative review in the NLP article on his so-called Skeptic's Dictionary web site repeated in his subsequent book of the same name.
Get this edition
And of course all three items have been referenced on Wikipedia at one time or another on the NLP-related pages. This is indeed 'the blind leading the blind. Given the typical response of academics to this kind of attitude - namely 'our way or the highway' - a significant mismatch between the majority of academics and the developers of NLP was pretty inevitable. For an example of this clash of attitudes in action see the comments in Dr Heap's current paper such as: 'To arrive at these kinds of generalisations about the human mind and behaviour would certainly require prolonged, systematic and meticulous investigation of human subjects using robust procedures, observing, recording and analysing the phenomena under investigation.
There is just no other way of doing this.
Yet, when they made their assertions, the authors never revealed any of this to their students and to their readers; they merely stated that this was what they had noticed. Italics added for emphasis In the first place, this is a highly idealised account of how research works.
And in any case, compare this statement with Bandler and Grinder's own take on the subject in Frogs into Princes remembering that the book is based on transcripts of actual NLP-related training seminars, edited by Steve Andreas, and therefore gives us fairly direct information about what Bandler and Grinder were saying to their students in : 'You ask somebody a question. They say 'Hm, let's see,'and they look up and to their left, and tilt their head in the same direction.
When people look up, they are making pictures internally. It's a lie, you know. Everything we're going to tell you is a lie. All generalizations are a lie. Since we have no claim on truth we will be lying to you consistently throughout this seminar.
We're only interested in what works. The attitude that: 'you must do research the one and only way we regard as valid' might well be okay - IF someone is claiming that they are dealing in 'proven facts', 'the truth' or whatever. But Bandler and Grinder had not made such claims. They were indeed deliberately offering their generalisations as nothing more concrete than 'what we have noticed. If neither of them has the flexibility to adjust, no learning occurs.
Knowing what you know now about representational systems, you can understand how it is possible for a child to be 'educationally handicapped' one year, and do fine the next year. Michael Grinder is John Grinder's brother. Like many other critics, Dr Heap seems less than impressed with the suggestion that NLP-related techniques can produce high-speed results e. What they would find is a record of three brief sessions all under 30 minutes in which Richard Bandler deals with three cases which have previously proved intransigent in the face of therapeutic intervention.
I offer this as evidence with some confidence, since all three sessions were conducted under laboratory conditions and monitored and videoed by faculty members at Marshall University in West Virginia, USA, and the results checked for durability approximately 8 months later. Note, although NLP is not a form of therapy, Bandler uses the NLP-related techniques as adjuncts to the therapeutic process during these sessions. I might also point out that there appears to be an ongoing link between Marshall and NLP, since a recent September check on Marshall University's web site listed a certain William A.
And lastly, in this section, I refer you to point 4 of Dr Heap's section, Further developments of NLP, where he writes: 'NLP training courses abound and NLP now seems to be most influential in management training, lifestyle coaching, and so on. Particularly with reference to this, the term "growth industry" appears to be apposite.
This may have something to do with the fact that the supply side of the market for psychological therapies looks pretty much saturated and the major potential customer in the UK at least, namely the National Health Service, tends to favour a limited range of products, notably those that are labelled 'evidence based'. Despite his admission that he knows 'little about this last mentioned area of work', Dr Heap promptly offers a description of what is going on, and an equally fictitious 'explanation' for why it is happening.
The use of NLP and NLP-related techniques in business is my own particular area of investigation and practice, and I have written an introductory 'how to' guide to the subject now called Develop Your NLP Skills which was first published over ten years ago - January , to be precise.
Johnson's Selling with NLP A third book published that same year was Robert Dilts' Effective Presentation Skills, of particular interest here since it is little more than a description of a number of NLP-related techniques and was based on the training materials Dilts used in a seminar previously 'designed for the Italian National Railways as part of its efforts to becoming [sic] a 'learning organization'' p xi.
But of course these came some years after Dr Heap's review of , and therefore he couldn't have known about them at that time.
And he could have known about all of these books - and several others of a similar nature, such as John Grinder and Michael McMasters' Precision - by the time he came to write his latest paper. Thus obviating the entirely erroneous claims quoted above.
Follow the author
Clearly, then, in making these claims about the development and progress of the field of NLP, Dr Heap has once again demonstrated the thorough lack of knowledge upon which he has constructed his supposedly well-informed discussion of those topics.
And, unfortunately, there's more. The heart of the matter Before answering Dr Heap's claims, it is necessary that we consider what those claims are. Specifically: 'The present author is satisfied that the assertions of NLP writers concerning representational systems have been objectively and fairly investigated and found to be lacking. If we adopt a purely pedantic viewpoint, Dr Heap is on the face of it simply stating his opinion.
A second questionable aspect of the statement is the use of the words 'NLP writers', a label Dr Heap fails to define. As I said earlier, it is certainly not acceptable to assume that everyone who writes about NLP-related topics is automatically qualified to present a fair and accurate version of those topics. One book claiming to be about NLP, published only a few months ago, includes material on something the author calls 'the grey zone', which is not in any other book on NLP that I've read, and is certainly not an authentic NLP-related concept.
Likewise the author drags in 'Kundalini energy', 'Chakras' and 'spiritual awakening', though John Grinder has made it crystal clear that NLP was never intended to address any aspects of 'spirituality'.
In short, if we were to accept this part of Dr Heap's statement as valid then he would be free to quote absolutely anyone who has written about NLP as in Neuro-Linguistic Programming , regardless of how accurately their claims reflected the claims of the creators and co-developers, Richard Bandler and John Grinder.
My objection, then, is not to Dr Heap holding any particular opinion, or his choice to accept any writer on NLP as authoritative regardless of whether their claims are true to the claims of the two genuine authorities on the subject. What I question is his error in presenting his beliefs as facts, over a substantial period of time, when in practice these particular opinions are almost completely erroneous.
If Dr Heap's review is to have any value at all then it must be assumed that he meant it to be, and still regards it as being, tied directly to the claims made by Bandler and Grinder - and no one else. On this basis, given Dr Heap's overall conclusion as stated above, the following propositions must all be true: The 'present author' i. Dr Heap must be genuinely qualified to make a valid assessment of: what the creators of NLP were asserting regarding representational systems, the accuracy of the understanding of those claims by the 'investigators' whose work was under review, the accuracy of the experimental findings, and the degree to which the experimental findings do or do not support the assertions that have actually been made regarding the representational systems by Bandler and Grinder.
The assertions made by Bandler and Grinder concerning representational systems must have been accurately understood by the investigators, and accurately reflected by their experimental designs. The outcome of the experiments under review must have shown very little support for the relevant claims made by Bandler and Grinder.
The original review In his , detailed review of various experiments on a couple of NLP-related techniques Dr Heap has never discussed NLP itself in any of these papers - see point 1 in Evaluating the claims, above , Dr Heap included some 63 abstracts.
I have been able to obtain all but three of those abstracts - which are mainly of dissertations by candidates for a Masters or Ph. And the first point to notice, in light of Dr Heap's choice to use them as the basis for his evaluation for the whole field of NLP, is that they are of incredibly varying quality.
Presentation Skills for Students by Lucinda Becker Macmillan - Presentation Skills for Students is a practical, accessible guide for all students in further or higher education. It discusses speaking effectively in seminars, tutorials, and formal presentations, and, unusually, in leisure activities, such as standing for office, and speaking at or chairing a committee or society meeting.
Finally, it helps with career research, including a practical, step by step guide to a successful job interview. Regular checklists and the friendly, down to earth style make this an ideal reference tool.
Scientific Papers and Presentations by Martha Davis Academic Press - Electronic publishing and electronic means of text and data presentation have changed enormously since the first edition was first published in This second edition applies traditional principles to today's, modern techniques.
In addition to substantial changes on the poster presentations and visual aids chapters, the chapter on proposal writing discusses in more detail grant writing proposals.
A new chapter has also been dedicated to international students studying in the United States. Eric Walters, Gale C. Walters - Routledge - Having the ability to speak confidently; engage the audience; make a clear, well-argued case; and handle any tricky situations, is rarely a natural talent, but it can be learned through application and practice.
At some point in their careers, the majority of scientists have to stand up in front of an inquisitive audience or board and present information.
This can be a stressful experience for many. For scientists, the experience may be further complicated by the specialist nature of the data and the fact that most self-help books are aimed at business or social situations. Successful Presentation Skills by Andrew Bradbury Kogan Page - A good presentation involves effective communication and essential for business success.
From training new employees to building rapport with potential clients, the ability to deliver information is a required skill. This guide addresses the common problems people face - overcoming nerves, handling visual aids, and shaping the presentation itself. The Complete Presentation Skills Handbook: How to Understand and Reach Your Audience for Maximum Impact and Success by Suzy Siddons Kogan Page - Presentations are required in a hugely diverse range of situations, and effective speakers must be able to get their messages across clearly, succinctly and without boring their audience.
The Complete Presentation Skills Handbook will help anyone become prepared for and confident about giving presentations.
Straightforward and authoritative, this book is a guide to giving the right presentation to an audience. It covers all the questions anyone should ask themselves before giving a presentation. It presents a checklist that enables readers to tailor their presentations to their own circumstances.They were indeed deliberately offering their generalisations as nothing more concrete than 'what we have noticed. Coll, Michael F. A second questionable aspect of the statement is the use of the words 'NLP writers', a label Dr Heap fails to define.
In the cases of Hammer and Graunke , for instance, the experimenters correctly note that their subjects readily switched between rep' systems during an interaction. For the benefit of anyone not familiar with IV1, this is the only version which contains a full list of references to the material all Abstracts originally reviewed, and is available along with IV2 on Dr Heap's web site.